Talk:Monarch of the United Kingdom
Wow, great list. And what are we going to do with it, anyway? Only twelve, in three hundred years? That surprises me, somehow. Turtle Fan 03:25, October 29, 2009 (UTC) ::Well, I'm planning to follow the model of either pope or President (US-Southern Victory), not sure which yet. I might list all of the OTL twelve, with notes to the side saying which HT work they are relevant two, and then create something for Charles III of Britain and Henry IX of Britain. Or I could break it down by story and go from there. :::How many of them are relevant? I'm only coming up with George III and the twentieth-century ones offhand. Turtle Fan 19:01, October 29, 2009 (UTC) ::::Victoria gets around. Not dramtically relevent. TR 19:08, October 29, 2009 (UTC) :::::Oh, yes, well we all know she gets around. ;-) Turtle Fan 21:30, October 29, 2009 (UTC) ::I had things to attend to, so I didn't finish, obviously. TR 14:49, October 29, 2009 (UTC) Edward IX Mentioned in Passing? I know that Charles III is the current king of the British Empire in The Two Georges, however, what does "in passing" mean? Does that mean Edward IX died or abdicated the throne? The term "in passing" needs to be more specific. I just wanted to know. 14:14, October 11, 2014 (UTC)Jacob Chesley :It means there is a one-off reference to an Edward IX having reigned. Bushell observes a hotel that doesn't look it had been painted since the reign of Edward IX. He doesn't dwell on it, and no one else mentions Edward IX again. It's a completely incidental reference, and Bushell immediately returns to the matter at hand. Hence, Edward is mentioned "in passing". TR (talk) 15:08, October 11, 2014 (UTC) Edward VII article? I figured this would be as good a place as any to discuss this. In BA, Vasili Yasevich, our White Russian near Harbin, is able to loot some English gold sovereign coins. He notes that most had Victoria's image, but that some had her son Edward. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time HT has directly referenced Edward VII in any way, shape, or form. But it's a very incidental reference, really something to be included in annotations if we creat them. On the other hand, we've created some historical character articles on that slender sort of basis, and I feel like this may the only opportunity HT is going to afford us to create an Edward VII page. It's quite possible HT might surprise us with an Edwardian tale, but his next story set between 1900 and 1910 will be his first story set between 1900 and 1910. As an added bit of silliness to consider: we have every monarch between George V and Elizabeth II--if we have Edward VII, we'd have everyone between Victoria and Elizabeth, which is kind of cool in a completely trivial sort of way. Thoughts? TR (talk) 17:31, July 30, 2015 (UTC) :We did get a couple of Caesars that way from "Death in Vesunna" so I see why not, especially if it gives us a straight run of British monarchs. ML4E (talk) 18:54, July 30, 2015 (UTC) :I was going to say no, and that we should reevaluate the other articles created on such premises, but frankly, the prospect of filling the straight has won me over. Turtle Fan (talk) 21:28, July 30, 2015 (UTC) ::It's worth pointing out, the Roman coins were a reasonably important plot point in DiV--coins with those emperors should have looked much more worn, and they were perfectly stamped, when they shouldn't have been with Roman technology etc. But, if we're ok with Edward VII, then when the time comes, we shall create it. TR (talk) 21:55, July 30, 2015 (UTC) The Two Georges With the addition of several OTL monarchs, we seem to have a straight run from Victoria to Charles III. Should the format be changes to the chart form we have for SV and Atlantis? ML4E (talk) 20:55, February 10, 2016 (UTC) :Sounds good to me. It would also be good to reformat it so it's just a little more in-universe, or at least separate the story portions from the lit comms. It's just a little awkward as it is. However, it might be good to put a space between George III and Victoria to explain something to the effect of "we don't know what happened in these years." :It's also really irritating that there's no actual article for Edward IX. When (I presume) a MFC-in-T2G list is created, his entry can read "Edward IX was a British King-Emperor who reigned in the 20th century" followed by a lit comm.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 21:05, February 10, 2016 (UTC) We have Edward IX of Britain (The Two Georges) as a redirect to T2G sub-section of this article. I believe we were using this as a placeholder since there wasn't anything substantial for an article. If and when we create a "Minor Characters", something should be made for him and the redirect changed to it. ML4E (talk) 22:09, February 10, 2016 (UTC) Atlantis Is an Atlantis chart really necessary? There are no deviations from OTL.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 17:53, June 6, 2016 (UTC) :I suppose not. George and Victoria can go in the "other monarchs" section. TR (talk) 22:27, June 6, 2016 (UTC) :If I'm not mistaken, those two are the only ones mentioned by name so yes, I think the chart probably can be removed. ML4E (talk) 17:58, June 7, 2016 (UTC) ::Some pre-Union English kings and queens get name-dropped, but yeah, I agree. Turtle Fan (talk) 20:16, June 7, 2016 (UTC) George VI Why did you add the bolded for George VI of Britain in "Other Monarchs" to reigning in most of The War That Came Early Jonathan? He is the only British monarch in the whole series and neither Horace Wilson nor the military in their subsequent coup removed him even temporarily. ML4E (talk) 18:40, July 24, 2016 (UTC) :The first subchapter of Hitler's War takes place during the reign of Edward VIII of Britain. Maybe I should clarify that.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 05:49, July 25, 2016 (UTC) :Maybe that is too small a section of a six book series to be bothered with. I think the original is fine without any caveats. ML4E (talk) 17:05, July 25, 2016 (UTC) ::Edward isn't mentioned in that section, which lasts about 5 pages. It's fair to assume, given what we know, but I think as ML4E said, we are talking about 0.1% of the overall page count of the series. We don't need the caveat. TR (talk) 18:04, August 4, 2016 (UTC) Adding in Monarchs of England Since HT's references to pre-Union monarchs who reigned after the POD of any story are rare, and there is no reason to think they will increase, I propose adding Monarchs of England to this list, as demonstrated here.JonathanMarkoff (talk) 09:24, December 26, 2018 (UTC) :Your argument for this move does a better job of demonstrating why we shouldn't: the pre-unification English monarchy is a minor institution in HT's bibliography. It plays and extremely important role in RB, plays a small role early in ADF and Atlantis, and that's it. Since the page could never stand on its own, I don't see why adding it into the MonarchsUK page will be of any benefit. TR (talk) 17:19, December 26, 2018 (UTC) ::Oh boy, your probably right TR. While the English monarchy played a major role in Ruled Britannia (Elizabeth I, Queen Isabella and King Albert) as well as minor roles in both the Atlantis Series and A Different Flesh, having a Monarchs of England article would probably out of the question due to their not being enough information to support an article. Putting the info about the English monarchs on the British Monarchs article would also just make the article confusing. We're kinda in a pickle in this situation. --JCC the Alternate Historian (talk) 21:35, December 26, 2018 (UTC) :::We could possibly use parallelism to justify a separate list as a catch-all for what TR mentioned above, JCC repeated, and bit of flotsam and jetsam like Yeager thinking of Richard the Lion-Hearted. I don't see the need, but I'd prefer that to tacking it onto the British list. Turtle Fan (talk) 23:51, December 26, 2018 (UTC) ::::I played with it on my blog page: https://turtledove.wikia.com/wiki/User_blog:TR/Monarch_of_England_(for_my_amusement) "Anemic" is too generous a word for the final appearance. We don't need the English Monarchs page, and we certainly don't need to combine it with the UK monarchs page. TR (talk) 00:05, December 27, 2018 (UTC) :::::Yeah, I really don't see the need at all. Turtle Fan (talk) 03:54, December 27, 2018 (UTC)